Our Judiciary is in a real state of mess courtesy our very own judicial wisdom, a motley group of lawyers permanently creating hurdles, immense political and media pressure, extensive judicial corruption, judicial nepotism, multiple lobbies exerting themselves to have their sway on judgements, pressure of reservation for certain sections on judicial appointments, aggressive or submissive Government, ideological propensities of Justices guiding their judgements, ideological and political predilections of political party in power, defiant non-compliance of judicial orders, non-availability of mechanism at Judiciary’s disposal to enforce their pronouncements etc. Yet it is a real-time surprise that Justices, advocates…none succumbed to those excruciating judicial agonies at all. Only financially distressed litigants suffer, that too silently without Judiciary ever even knowing about that.
Genesis of the malaise is hidden not far away in foundation of the judiciary itself. While Bharatiya society has always been oriented towards ancient yet ever-modern concept of Nyaya, Indian judiciary is based on delivering judgements i.e. merely punishing the culprit based on flawed Indian Evidence Act enacted by British occupiers of the nation instead of reversing the entire wrong perpetrated encompassing everyone who may be affected by any aspect of the case. Ancient intellection of Nyaya has a holistic approach towards all aberrations in society till eradication of the root-cause so as to ensure, society remains healthy from the stand-point of crime, disorder and aberration. This holistic approach of Nyaya has guiding principles vested in Sanatana cultural heritage of righteousness, impartiality, morality, concept of Karmayoga involving Papa, Punya and reincarnation to suffer proceeds of Karma-s performed earlier i.e. no escape from consequences of Karma-s, Gurukula education, society’s history and traditions, respect for majority views etc. Based on these principles of Nyaya, Maharsi Manu authored a civil code millennia ago to raise an ordered, structured society. The ancient code is the greatest one as it is valid even now with minor modifications in harmony with changing times. Chapter-8 of the Smriti is dedicated to judiciary and jurisprudence exclusively.
Partyaham Desadrstaisca Sastraddastaisca Hetubhiha I
Astadasasu Margesu Nibaddhani Prthakkprthak II VIII / 3 II
They must daily adjudicate all eighteen types of disputes individually guided by prevailing practices in the country, injunctions and ordainments enshrined in scriptures.
Maharsi Manu has classified all possible disputes and contentions into eighteen orders that must be resolved on day to day basis by entire congregation in a royal court. Proceedings, judgements must be drafted in consonance with values and practices prevailing in the society, Kingdom as well as scriptural injunctions. Every case must be probed into individually i.e. experts specialising in the issue and all other factors related to that alone should be consulted. Colonial practice of summer, winter vacations in higher judiciary in spite of burgeoning cases pending for decades causing public outrage, drives home the point of adjudications on day to day basis as emphasised in the Sloka. Similarly, scope of cases to be attended by a royal court is also specified. They are not entirely at liberty to pick up any case on their own volition. Significance of this mandate by Maharsi Manu can be comprehended by recent instances of higher judiciary agreeing to adjudicate frivolous cases at the expense of urgent ones. It goes to the accolade of immense wisdom of Maharsi Manu who authored long ago that stands relevant even today. Now catalogued are a few selected orders of disputes for this presentation that must be adjudicated on day to day basis.
Tesamadyamrinadanam Niksepoasvamivikrayaha I
Sambhuyam Ca Samutthanam Dattasyanapakarma Ca II VIII / 4 II
Vetanasyaiva Cadanam Samvidasca Vyatikramaha I
Krayavikrayanusayo Vivadaha Svamipalayoha II VIII / 5 II
Simavivadadharmasca Parusye Dandavacike I
Steyam Ca Sahasam Caivam Strisangrahanameva Ca II VIII / 6 II
Stripundharmo Vibhagasca Dyutamavhya Eva Ca I
Padanyastadasaitani Vyavaharasthitaviha II VIII / 7 II
Those eighteen orders are – loan default, contract violation, selling without being real owner, tormenting someone in cahoots with others, refusal to return taken earlier, unfair deduction or non-payment of compensation, refusal to honour commitment, disputes in business transactions, dispute between owner and attendant of cattle, dispute over boundaries, perpetrating harsh retribution upon someone, uttering harsh words, thievery and robbery, assaulting someone, promiscuity, dereliction of obligations by husband or wife, disputes pertaining to inheritance, gambling and dicey speculations.
Esu Sthanesu Bhuyistham Vivadam Caratama Nrnam I
Dharmam Sasvatamasritya Kuryatkaryavinirnayam II VIII / 8 II
In these Vyavahara-s, disputes of all be attended by resorting to refuge in Dharma.
Principles of Dharma alone must govern laws to be enforced while dispensing justice.
Yasmindese Nisidanti Vipra Vedavidastrayah I
Rajnascadhikrto Vidvanbrahmanastam Sabhama Viduh II VIII / 11 II
Where three scholars of Veda-s are seated alongwith a learned one conversant with the subject, it is Brahmasabha.
Brahmasabha implies an august assembly of erudite scholars whose words of judgement are sacrosanct.
Dharmo Viddhastvadharmena Sabham Yatropatisthate I
Salyam Casya Na Krntanti Viddhastatra Sabhasadaha II VIII / 12 II
Every member of such a court is debilitated and enfeebled wherein Dharma stands for trial after being impaired by Adharma followed by absence of surgical remedy.
Dharma is sacrosanct in every situation. If a court of justice fails to adhere to canons of Dharma, not only is it miscarriage of justice but also very legality and sanctity of the court itself is jeopardised. Most glaring instance of such an unpalatable situation arose during dreaded era of Emergency-1975 imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi with the sole intention to remain glued to power. Highest judiciary at Supreme Court abrogated right to life and liberty being fundamental rights any more. Supreme Court ceased to be the highest court when they stayed judgement of Allahabad High Court and allowed time to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to subvert the Constitution itself.
Dharma Eva Hato Hanti Dharmo Raksati Raksitaha I
Tasmaddharmo Na Hantavyo Ma No Dharmo Hatoavadhit II VIII / 15 II
Dharma violated destroys the perpetrator while Dharma defended defends the defender. Hence, Dharma must never be violated lest it destroys us.
Here goes the saying, when we defend Dharma earnestly, Dharma rises in turn to defend civilised society. Thus Dharma is sacrosanct and inviolable.
Padoadharmasya Kartarama Padaha Saksinamrcchati I
Padaha Sabhasadaha Sarvanpado Rajanamrcchati II VIII / 18 II
One-fourth of Adharma committed by King to the culprit, same to witnesses and members of the court and one-fourth to the King being attained if principles of Nyaya are not pursued.
No exploit of Adharma occurs in isolation, restricted to a few directly involved. Roots of every incidence of Adharma are spread far and wide involving almost entire society. Principles of Nyaya ordain, entire society must alert themselves for every exploit of Adharma to ensure, victim is amply compensated and rehabilitated, perpetrator duly punished and all social aberrations dealt with appropriately to prevent it’s recurrence in future.
Raja Bhavatyanenastu Muccyante Ca Sabhasadaha I
Eno Gacchati Kartarama Nindaarho Yatra Nindyate II VIII / 19 II
In a court wherein offender is punished, all are rendered pure with only the offender being attained to sin.
Court that appropriately punishes an offender, consecrate themselves. That is in complete harmony with canons of Nyaya.
Vandhyaaputrasu Caivam Syadraksanam Niskulasu Ca I
Pativrtasu Ca Strisu Vidhvasvaturasu Ca II VIII / 23 II
King is bound to protect women that are infertile, bereft of son or a male kin, loner in absence of husband, widow or sick and their possessions till such time they are empowered for themselves.
They constitute one of the most vulnerable sections of society. If they have no one to look after them, Kingdom must look after them.
Anritam Tu Vadandandayyaha Svavittasyansamastamam I
Tasyaiva Va Nidhanasya Samkhyayalpiyasim Kalam II VIII / 31 II
If someone proffers a falsified claim over an asset, he or she is liable to be punished by a pecuniary penalty amounting to one-eighth of the asset value or it may be decided based on it’s current worth.
There have been too many illegitimate claims of ownership of properties all over the nation. The Sloka prescribes monetary retribution as a deterrent to prevent such offences.
Yatha Nayatyasrkpatairmrigasya Mrigayuha Padam I
Nayettathaanumanena Dharmasya Nripatiha Padam II VIII / 34 II
The way a huntsman correctly locates lair by tracking blood-drops, King may arrive at precisely accurate conclusions in a dispute and dispense judgement guided by his wisdom.
King is expected to be endowed with excellent investigative and judicial wisdom to ensure, there is no miscarriage of administration of justice.
Aptaha Sarvesu Varnesu Karyaha Karyesu Saksinaha I
Sarvadharmavidoalubdha Viparitanstu Varjayet II VIII / 47 II
Erudite, virtuous, scrupulous, dispassionately detached and righteous ones from all Varna-s may be roped in as witnesses and avoid contrarians.
No discrimination on any ground is permissible in judicial proceedings. Anyone who may matter, is open to be invited to participate. Judicial wisdom of Manusmriti is absolutely non-discriminatory.
Sahasesu Ca Sarvesu Steyasamgrahanesu Ca I
Vagdandayosca Parusye Na Parikseta Saksinaha II VIII / 51 II
For offences of forcible oppression, theft, immorality, promiscuity, harsh utterances, witness may not be assessed.
With aforesaid offences, since witness account may not be reliable as these offences are often committed privately, King is entirely at liberty not to examine such witnesses or may not heavily rely on that while delivering his judgement. When higher judiciary mandated, any caste based offence committed privately, does not amount to a penal offence and witness if any, cannot be entertainable, reflected the same judicial erudition as enshrined in the Sloka.
Yatranibaddhoapikset Srunuyadvaapi Kincana I
Prstastrapi Tad Bruyaddathadrstam Yathasrutam II VIII / 55 II
A witness ought to visit court even if not summoned, to narrate whatever observed or heard when asked for that.
Presenting eye-witness narration of an offence in King’s court is bounden Dharma of every such witness. Such witnesses must approach court irrespective of invitation and contribute to proceedings when offered an opportunity by the King.
Satyama Saksye Bruvansaksi Lokanapnoti Puskalan I
Iha Canuttamama Kirtima Vagesa Brahmapujita II VIII / 59 II
Saksi who utters truth, attains fame in this and subsequent lives, is attained to higher planes of existence as the Vani is adored in scriptures.
Saksi is the eye-witness of an offence who presents himself in court on his own volition without subpoena to submit his account as a measure of Dharma. It has been declared a noble deed and such a Saksi attains higher planes of consciousness. How relevant is the injunction can be perceived only by contemporary realities viz. even accident victims on highways are not attended by passersby and they are left to die a painful death, witnesses eschew contributing to proceedings in court as they regard it an ‘worthless’ trouble, witnesses barter away their conscience for a consideration etc. There has been no serious effort so far to modify perceptions or to provide legal coverage to those who dare to state truth as witnesses in courts.
Yasminyasminvivade Tu KautasaksyamaKrtama Bhavet I
Tattatkaryama Nivarteta Krtama Capyakrtama Bhavet II VIII / 64 II
If false submissions by Saksi-s are discovered later, all such disputes may be re-considered and earlier judgements rescinded.
If submissions of a Saksi are discovered to be fabricated, case is re-visited, innocent wrongly implicated as accused is compensated and the deviant Saksi is duly brought to justice. Miscarriage of justice today may not enjoy the level of highest import that miscarriage of Nyaya enjoyed in the era bygone.
Lobhanmohadbhayanmaitratkamatkrodhatthaiva Ca I
Ajnanadbalabhavacca Saksyama Vitathamucyate II VIII / 65 II
Deposition rendered by a Saksi, influenced by Lobha, Moha, Bhaya, Mitrata, Kama, Krodha, Ajnana and puerility may be concluded to be falsified.
It is left to the wisdom of King presiding over proceedings in court to assess whether a Saksi’s submission is influenced by venalities of any kind. If concluded to be so, it may be rejected by the King howsoever emphatic the Saksi may be in submissions. This injunction attains tremendous import when we observe witnesses being manipulated to influence judgements or an outright stranger is roped in as a witness and the Judge is compelled to adhere to the evidence submitted howsoever fabricated or doctored. Judges do not enjoy the liberty of undertaking personal assessment of a witness’ reliability and reject evidence presented by him. What to speak of administering Nyaya, even proper judgement is not delivered quite often.
Adharmadandanam Loke Yasoghnam Kirtinasanam I
Asvagryam Ca Paratrani Yasmattatparivarjayet II VIII / 71 II
Awarding punishment without due diligence amounting to Adharma destroys one’s entire esteem and eminence of past, future as well as subsequent life too.
Awarding punishment without due diligence not only amounts to miscarriage of justice but also unrighteousness that may ruin reputation, prestige of victim’s family for several generations. It deprives them of their self-esteem too. Any amount of compensation cannot possibly reverse the injustice perpetrated or restore lost prestige and self-esteem. Adjudicating authority must be extra-ordinarily prudent while conducting proceedings and delivering judgements to avert such judicial disasters which have been far too common these days.
Adandyandandayan Raja Dandyanscaivapyadandayan I
Ayaso Mahadapnoti Narakam Caiva Gacchati II VIII / 72 II
King who punishes innocents instead of culprits, is invariably stigmatised to ignominy and languishes in hell.
Retribution to the crime of punishing innocents, allowing culprits to go away merrily amount to felony and proceeds of such a judicial delinquency are traumatic so much so that it may transcend infinitely affecting subsequent lives too.
Vagdandam Prathamam Kuryaddhigdandam Tadanantaram I
Tritiyam Dhanadandam Tu Vadhadandamataha Param II VIII / 73 II
Primary punishment is admonition, second being condemnation through reprimand, third being imposition of pecuniary penalties and the final one lashes or even beheading.
Hierarchy of retribution corresponds with severity of offence committed in pursuit of Nyaya allowing enough opportunities to reform oneself. However, if the first offence itself is grave demanding maximum punishment, hierarchy is ignored and appropriate proceeds awarded.
Vasisthavihitama Vrddhima Srjedvittavivardhinima I
Asitibhagama Grhniyanmasadvardhusikaha Sate II VIII / 83 II
Moneylender may claim interest on amount lent yet not more than 1.25 percent per month as laid down by erudite economists being the maximum limit.
To curb exploitative rather, extortionist propensities of moneylenders to extract maximum possible, interest payable has been quantified as a reasonable amount to be fair to both, lender and borrower. Interest claimed in excess is a punishable offence in the wisdom of Manusmriti.
Na Tvevadhau Sopakare Kausidim Vrddhimapnuyat I
Na Cadheha Kalasanrodhannisargoasti Na Vikrayaha II VIII / 84 II
Incremental addition in wealth must not be accepted on assets pledged to assist, nor can that be claimed or disposed off.
These are crystalline guidelines on how to deal with assets pledged. Addition to asset already pledged does not fall in the ambit of terms and conditions of pledge. Instances of assets pledged being misappropriated have been far too many and such restrictions have always been essential.
Kusidavrddhirdvaigunyam Natyeti Sakrdahrata I
Dhanye Sade Lave Vahye Natikramati Pancatam II VIII / 88 II
Interest accrued on principal amount must never exceed twice the principal; for grains, wool, fruits or carrier animals, it must not exceed five times the principal amount.
Total amount of interest leviable too is capped appropriately. When interest equals twice the principal, transaction is frozen and no more interest is counted. Similarly in case of material too, interest payable is capped within five times the principal amount borrowed.
Natisanvatsarim Vrddhim Na Cadrstam Punarharet I
Cakravrddhiha Kalavrddhiha Karita Kayika Ca Ya II VIII / 89 II
Must not realise interest of more than a year in one transaction; interest once waived must never be claimed later. Compound interest, periodically rising interest, charging interest higher than stipulated through exploits or compelling to undertake corporeal drudgery must be strictly avoided.
These are additional norms and restrictions to govern interest leviable on a principal amount.
Satya Na Bhasa Bhavati Yaddyapi Syatpratisthita I
Bahiscedbhdasyate Dharmanniyatadvayyavaharikat II VIII / 100 II
Any deed violative of established norms of Dharma, even if written down, is invalid and unacceptable.
An overriding rule of transactions that does not allow or condone illegality of any type even if added to a documented agreement. Sanctity of transactions enjoys paramount importance and no deviation is permissible in any form whatsoever.
Atha Mulamanaharyam Prakasakrayasodhitaha I
Adandyo Mucyate Rajna Nastiko Labhate Dhanam II VIII / 126 II
An asset whose antecedents are obscure yet duly transacted transparently for selling, must be restored to the original owner and the buyer, exonerated.
Herein, real ownership of an asset under transaction overrides every other consideration. No transaction can disregard actual ownership of an asset if conducted inappropriately. It upholds spirit of Nyaya, honours ends of justice, expounds brilliance and farsightedness of the judicial wisdom enshrined in Manusmriti.
Yo Gramadesasanghanama Krtva Satyena Samvidam I
Visamvadennaro Lobhattama Rastradvipravasayet II VIII / 136 II
One who reneges on a verified pledge whatsoever, tendered to a person, village, region or community out of sheer avarice, should be banished from country by the King.
Word of commitment enjoyed ultimate sanctity as principles of Nyaya were sacrosanct. When justice is destined to be delivered instead of Nyaya, affidavits / agreements on stamp papers are prepared and notarified. Even then these are often challenged in courts of law to prove authenticity thereof.
Kritva Vikriya Va Kimciddyasyehanusayo Bhavet I
Soantardasahattad Dravyama Daddyaccaivadadita Va II VIII / 139 II
If one is penitent after selling or buying an object, it may be reversed within ten days after that.
An extra-ordinary feature integral to the institution of Nyaya allows the seller to demand reversal of the transaction undertaken if the seller eventually suffers from change of circumstances or otherwise. It is not permitted under justice delivery system once transaction is completed by filing of all authenticated documents irrespective of magnitude of change in compelling circumstances.
Yasminyasminkrte Karye Yasyehanusayo Bhavet I
Tamanena Vidhanena Dharme Pathi Nivesayet II VIII / 141 II
All those who develop a sense of penance, may be appropriately rehabilitated by the King.
That amounts to culmination of the process of Nyaya wherein a penitent offender is appropriately rehabilitated to liberate him from all compelling circumstances that forced him to commit the offence at first hand. In justice delivery system, rehabilitation of offender once convicted is completely neglected, rather deliberately eschewed driving the offender to evolve, rather degenerate into being a hardened criminal.
Tasam Cedavaruddhanam Carantinam Mitho Vane I
Yamutplutya Vrko Hanyanna Palastatra Kilvisi II VIII / 149 II
If a wolf suddenly leaps over to kill one in spite of their being herded well while grazing in jungle, the shepherd is not absolved of the liability to compensate.
Explicitly it states in the spirit of Nyaya, anyone holding anybody’s assests even if temporarily, is entirely responsible, accountable for it’s safety and integrity. Temporary custody or possession does not absolve anyone for being completely responsible for the asset.
Srutama Desama Ca Jatim Ca Karma Sarirameva Ca I
Vitathena Bruvandarpaddapyaha Syad Dvisatama Damam II VIII / 173 II
If someone derogates other owing to arrogance caused by superiority of Vidya, Desa, Varna and Sarira, he may be penalised with two-hundred Pana-s.
The judicial provision is truly extra-ordinary transcending even maximum confines of judicial wisdom. Can we expect a law being enacted in current dispensation banning egoism, snobbery, arrogance, superiority complex on account of any reason whatsoever ? Being declared threat to social order and civility ?
Kanam Vaapyathava Khanjamanyam Vaapi Yathavidham I
Tathyenapi Bruvandapyo Dandam Karsapanavaram II VIII / 174 II
If physically handicapped ones are addressed based on disabilities viz. one-eyed, lame etc., the perpetrator must be punished for at least one Karsapana.
Any reference to anyone’s disabilities in derogatory terms is a heinous offence demanding appropriate punishment. Such references amount to personal disgrace impossible to condone.
Mataram Pitaram Jayam Bhrataram Tanayam Gurum I
Aksarayanchatam Dapyaha Panthanam Cadadad Guroha II VIII / 175 II
For the offence of blaming and derogating mother, father, wife, brother, son and Guru or obstructing Guru, penalty of hundred Pana-s may be imposed.
Derogating anyone among elders was strictly prohibited. It reveals socio-refinement of a very high order under the dispensation of Nyaya. It has consumed years of protest and miseries undergone by elders before appropriate laws could be enacted to assure dignity and honour of elders are never violated. However, it is always better to improve upon Samskara-s to enable all not to derogate their elders, accord due ragards to them by heart.
Raksandharmena Bhutani Raja Vadhyansca Ghatayan I
Yajateaharaharyajnauha Sahasrasatadaksinaiha II VIII / 183 II
By righteously protecting natives, by punishing the guity and offenders, King earns enormous boons of hundred-thousand Yajna-s solemnised simultaneously.
Upholding highest order of Dharma is a cardinal responsibility of every monarch in the true spirit of Nyaya. It is such a divine mandate cast upon a King that it’s proper observance amounts to undertaking scores of Yajna-s concurrently causing release of tremendous impact on Absolute Consciousness.
Yoaraksanbalimadatte Karama Sulkama Ca Parthivaha I
Pratibhagama Ca Dandama Ca Saha Sadyo Narakama Vrajet II VIII / 184 II
King who collects taxes, octroi, penalties from his subjects without defending them, is soon mortified.
Collection of revenue from his subjects is inevitably intertwined with onerous responsibility of providing all necessities, security of life and dignity to them. King who collects revenue yet abstains from discharging onerous responsibility encumbered with it, is inevitably dethroned and destroyed. We have been witness to the Sloka in action wherein even elected Governments were dislodged when they failed to honour their responsibilities though they continued not only collecting revenues but also raising them significantly over their tenures.
Anapeksitmaryadam Nastikam Vipralumpakam I
Araksitaramattaram Nripam Vidyadadhogatim II VIII / 186 II
King violating canons of Dharma being atheist and rapacious, seizing entire wealth and declining to protect his subjects, is destined to be ruined.
King is mandated to be righteous, an ardent follower of his Dharma. Pursuit of Nyaya is based on pursuit of one’s Dharma as Dharma and Nyaya are inseparable. When a King violates canons of Dharma, he is destined to be ruined as pursuit of Dharma ensures King’s survival. Not only ancient but also contemporary history is replete with instances affirming the principle.
Pitaacaryaha Suhranmata Bharya Putraha Purohitaha I
Nadandyo Nama Rajnyoasti Yaha Svadharme Na Tisthati II VIII / 202 II
One violating Svadharma is never exempt from Danda irrespective of being Pita, Acarya, Suhrt, Mata, Bharya, Putra or Purohita.
Institution of Nyaya is so sacrosanct that it is impossible for anyone howsoever influential, to escape it’s long arms. There is absolutely no exception and no one is above principles of Nyaya. Even Bhagavan Sri Rama, Vasudeva Sri Krsna submitted themselves to Nyaya with utmost obedience and reverence, never ever even considered the idea of violating it.
Karsapanama Bhavedyandaha Yatranyaha Prakrto Janaha I
Tatra Raja Bhaveddandyaha Saharamiti Dharana II VIII / 203 II
For an offence committed by an ordinary one and eligible for one unit of penalty, King must be punished by thousand times of the amount for the same offence committed by him.
In continuation of the previous Sloka, affirmed here in unequivocal terms is that even King who presides over the institution of Nyaya, cannot escape it under any circumstance. In fact, King is entitled to thousand times more mortification, retribution and penance than an ordinary native for the same offence as King is the last person expected to be involved in committing any offence.
Several instances are now on record wherein not only rulers but also Justices have been involved in committing offences, going away scot free without being punished for hidden infirmities in laws on statue books.
Astapadyama Tu Sudrasya Steye Bhavati Kilvisama I
Sodasaiva Tu Vaisyasya Dvatrinsatksatriyasya Ca II VIII / 204 II
Brahamanasya Catuhasastiha Purnama Vaapi Satama Bhavet I
Dviguna Va Catuhasastistaddosagunaviddhi Saha II VIII / 205 II
Even as a lesser accomplished Sudra be awarded eight times, Vaisya sixteen times, Ksatriya thirty-two times and a Brahmana sixty-four or hundred or one hundred twenty-eight times of the amount of wealth purloined.
Aforesaid Varna based punishment protocol not only reveals Nyaya of the highest order but also social equity sacrosanct and inviolable. Brahmana-s have been accorded maximum retribution for an offence they are not expected as well as mandated to commit being endowed with enormous Brahamanical piety. Judiciary inherited from Britain awards equal punishment for all often inviting serious allegations of social injustice. It is a pity that in spite of such a stringent retribution protocol for Savarna-s, dubious politicians have malevolently distorted it to the hilt only to create divisions weakening Hindu society and the nation.
Endram Sthanamabhiprepsuryasascaksayamavyayama I
Nopekset Ksanamapi Raja Sahasikam Naram II VIII / 207 II
King aspiring to attain imperishable, inexhaustible fame and wealth like Indra, must not procrastinate punishing felons and desperadoes even for a moment.
Sloka exerts augmented emphasis on the institution of Nyaya with the injunction that King does not enjoy the liberty of ignoring it even for a moment. Delinquents and deviants are called upon to be punished earliest possible by moving the process of Nyaya in the interest of all concerned. On the contrary, Judiciary inherited from British occupiers have been utter failure on this count. Not only backlog of outstanding cases runs into lakhs, there are scores of pending cases transcending two to three generations of litigants. It is a crying shame indeed.
Gurum Va Balavrddhau Va Brahmanam Va Bahusrutam I
Atatayinamayantam Hanyadevavicarayan II VIII / 211 II
Natatayivadhe Doso Hanturbhavati Kascana I
Prakasam Vaaprakasam Va Manyustam Manyumrcchati II VIII / 212 II
One must spontaneously and unhesitatingly slay anyone approaching with intention to torment whether he be Guru, Brahmana, erudite scholar, young or old. No evil accrues to the slayer of a harrier whether slays overtly or covertly as it is fury that combats fury.
In extreme and extra-ordinary circumstances as specified, one enjoys the privilege of retaliating forcefully to defend without inviting the allegation of ‘taking law in your own hands’. We have been witnessing cosequences of not acting to defend, rushing to law-enforcement authorities for justice, then being reduced to being pathetically crying victims. To be a bit more illustrative, women must have unmitigated freedom to kill anyone attempting to violate their chastity, entirely in harmony with principles of Nyaya contrary to what contemporary judiciary delivers after years of sniveling and screaming.
Paradarabhimarsesu Pravrttannranmahipatiha I
Udvejanakarairdandaisccinnayitva Pravasayet II VIII / 213 II
Those indulging in promiscuity may be crippled to cause agony, then expelled from the state.
Integrity of one’s character is invaluable and traits of promiscuity abominable. It is ironical to behold that Nyaya abhors promiscuity while Judiciary does not regard it a crime at all in spite of all ill-effects on families, societies and even governance of the nation. When those in positions of authority resort to promiscuity, it is just a disaster-galore that nation is engulged into not to speak of security hazards.
Yasya Stenaha Pure Nasti Nanyastrigo Na Dustavak I
Na Sahasikadandaghnau Sa Raja Sakralokabhak II VIII / 219 II
King of a Kingdom bereft of thieves, philanderers, deprecators, tormentors and transgressors of royal decree is as colossal as Indra.
That’s an ideal scenario but not impossible to attain albeit difficult. If a King is successful in attaining a regime of lowest incidence of crimes, he may be closest possible to the accolade of being declared ‘as colossal as Indra’. Even sincere efforts to attain the ambitious albeit arduous goal assures governance of the highest order.
Na Mata Na Pita Na Stri Na Putrastyagamarhati I
Tyajannapapitanetrajna Dandyaha Satani Sat II VIII / 222 II
Neither mother, nor father, wife and son are to be disowned. If so in spite of their being innocent, King may punish with six-hundred Pana.
The mandate symbolises not only pinnacle of Nyaya but also societal assurance of well being of all. In contemporary judicial system, it was introduced after decades of agonies undergone by many and persistent demands from those concerned from all quarters.
Thus we behold, British judicial system was thrust upon us in spite of our being so enriched with the dynamic and vibrant institution of Nyaya which could have been modified according to changing circumstances over decades post-1947. Changes were brought in belatedly only after social pressure mounted, that too half heartedly. Loopholes were deliberately left unplugged so as to allow bigwigs in power to escape paws and fangs of laws comfortably. Judicial activism too had been selective at best, best summed up by retired Justice Ruma Pal of Supreme Court, “Judges were afflicted with multitude of sins but culled out seven deadly ones – brushing under the carpet, hypocrisy, secrecy, plagiarism and prolixity, intellectual arrogance or dishonesty, judicial indiscipline and nepotism.” During Emergency-1975, highest Judiciary crawled before the Executive when they were nudged just to bend. Most revolutionary judicial reform undertaken so far i.e. National Judicial Appointments Commission was nullified by the Judiciary itself and the process of self-mortification was initiated by an eminent jurist Falisam Nariman !! They have resolved to sign their own appointment orders through Collagium System to perpetuate ‘Uncle-Aunty’ culture, so dear to them that has led to perpetual friction and attrition with the Government. President Abraham Lincoln once said “public opinion is everything”. So let us wait for the day longingly for masses of the country to wake up and demand comprehensive system of Nyaya to be instituted in the country to replace ‘Buckingham Palace’ brand of judiciary that we are condemned with and languishing since then.